Soap box weaving and bobbing on the waves of the sea of my frustration

I grew up before the Internet. My entire adolescence was devoid of Internet access. That's not to say there were no computers, but getting 'online' was a rarity and was limited to local BBS's. So I knew my bullies face to face. They were often big, dumb and mean. As a geek/nerd in that time, you learn how to face them, without stooping to their level or avoiding them all together (not really so easy). So what happened?

Now with the Internet there are bullies every where. Forums and chat rooms are filled with them. The thing is, they aren't the big dummies any more. They are reasonably smart people that should know better but they either don't care or never learned.

These online bullies, often known as 'trolls', pick on and laugh at the 'noobs', the less Internet savvy. Go to any forum, blog, social site, and you'll see it. I visit digg.com frequently for interesting news. From time to time I read the comments associated with the stories and the amount of trolling and ignorance is astounding. There is rarely respect for thought out discussion. More frequently than not, comments are emotional and based on misinformation.

What happened to intellectual discourse? Did it ever really exist in the general public? Is the lack or respect on the Internet a reflection of the lack of respect outside in the real world?

I wonder if the ease in which someone can post an anonymous comment gives the author the feeling that it's OK to let their thoughts go without consideration for others? Let's face it, most things posted on the Internet would never be spoken aloud in a face to face conversation.

It could be argued that it allows us to be more honest with our feelings. Perhaps, but if that's the case there are a lot of assholes and douche bags out there.

And really, if you cannot say it in person, but you can online, then it's simply another kind of passive aggressiveness. I should know I am passive aggressive myself. Does that mean human society is becoming more passive aggressive? I doubt it. I'm sure the Internet is just allowing everyone to see the true nature of some people.

The interesting thing is that passive aggressive behavior is often linked to being bullied, in one way or another. It's a defense mechanism. Direct confrontation is one sided. With a physical bully, they are bigger or have some power over you. Since direct is not available an indirect solution is found. Indirect doesn't mean bad, but it can lead to indirect attacks that are really no better than the bully's direct attack. I think that is what we are seeing online. The evolution of the bullied becoming the bullies.

Geek is cool now. That nerd sitting next to you might be the next Michael Dell, Biz Stone, or even Bill Gates. People are attracted to power. But these geeks and nerds are still often less confident in social situations and the big physical bullies are plenty confident. This struggle of powers is creating sides, sides that have been in battle for years but now with the Internet the geeks have a powerful new weapon. The problem is that this weapon has made them no better than the bullies they hate.

Originally I thought to blame all of this on the families that do not spend enough time with their kids. Parents that are so focused on their jobs that their kids suffer for it. While I do think this contributes, they are not completely to blame. Our society as a whole as shifted away from respect, so people are feeling that it's OK to not be respectful, even those who are old enough to have been taught respect.

We cannot discipline our kids, for fear of being accused of child abuse. Teachers are no longer allowed to have failing students. Everyone must be the same. We've gotten so politically correct that real life rules are pushed aside for lame PC rules. You can't lets kids fail, so everyone else has to dumb down for that one dumb kid in class. Sure no one wants to be that dumb kid, but everyone knows were are not all the same. We act like everyone should be able to be a rocket scientist. While I agree that everyone should have the equal opportunity to be a rocket scientist, not everyone has what it takes and that is OK.

Instead schools are judged on on standardized tests and truly gifted children are forced to be bored in classes so that a few less intelligent kids will be able to move forward. I remember kids being held back a grade for failing or having to go to special education classes. These were the kids who became the bullies because they had to make up for their lack of educational achievement with physical prowess. Now that the school says all kids are the same, the smart ones are turning into the bullies because they need to stand out. They need to say, "Hey, I AM smarter than you. When you are online I'm going to call you a noob and not help you because this is MY domain."

It's funny, that we fight so hard to stay away from a socialized economy and socialized healthcare. All I hear from the extreme political right is about how the US is becoming a socialist country, but I never hear anything about our education system which is trying to homogenize our youth. Trying to make them fit into cookie cutter molds. They fight it but don't know why, they just know it's wrong. Is anyone helping these kids focus their energy constructively? It used to be the teachers, but they are over worked, under paid and forced to teach kids how to take standardized tests.

So in the end these trolls and online bullies, who are smart enough to know better, are having to come to terms with who they are and how they use their knowledge on their own. If they are lucky they'll find a positive role model. If not it may take them years to mature into productive members of a society that has forgotten how to respect one another.

Obama a Socialist?

In the last week or so Obama’s tax plan has been compared to socialism. I personally do not agree, though I can see why some would say this. Frankly the more recent bail-out plan that both McCain and Obama voted for is much more socialist than taxing the rich a bit more.

The bottom line is this: The gap between the rich and the middle-class is huge and getting larger. Is this acceptable?

I say, “No!”

There have been numerous examples through history that show how destabilizing and how damaging it can be for a country when the rich tower too far above the rest. That was a major catalyst for the French Revolution. Or another way to look at it, do we become serf or slaves to the rich land owners, bankers, politicians?

Again I say, “No!”

CEOs are getting paid huge amounts in bonuses and other benefits, aside from their large six figure salaries. Middle-class wages, however, are fairly stagnate and benefits are cut regularly. I don’t agree with unions but they may have to come back to bring fairness into the equation. The rich are getting richer off the backs of the middle-class who are working just as hard as always, maybe harder, and getting less for their work.

Is Obama or his tax plan going to completely level the playing field? It absolutely will not. Most of the wealthy that would be affected by Obama’s tax plan will barely feel the pinch. Most of them can afford to pay tax advisers to find loop holes and other ways to avoid paying all the taxes they are supposed to anyway. Hell even we in the middle class do that! We look for any way to reduce our taxes we can. No one likes paying taxes, but the wealthy can certainly afford to do so much more than I. When gas prices jump, when food prices jump, when equity in our homes plummets, what are we left with? Living paycheck to paycheck wondering if we’ll have enough gas to make it to work tomorrow? Fearing that if your wife loses her job that you’ll lose your house? Having to go to a food bank for the first time in your life so that your children can have a decent meal? The wealthy don’t have to worry about that. They should be ethically and socially responsible and help those who need help. It should be their personal duty to spread the wealth. They shouldn’t have to be told to help but some have to be told.

To all those very wealthy who would be adversely affected by Obama’s tax plan:

• Do you really need more than a couple houses? I can understand a vacation home and your ‘regular’ home but why more?
• Do you really need a $100,000 car, in some cases multiple high-priced cars? A $30-40K car is pretty nice these days.
• What are you spending your money on anyway? Are you wasting it on silly toys and rare foods? Are you hording it away?
• Why is it so bad to give a bit more to help keep the country that made you so wealthy running well? Help educate the children. Help the less fortunate get on their feet and make something of themselves. Help make wages fair and equitable for all. These things would help the entire country excel. Isn’t that a good thing?
  

So finally, no I don’t think Obama is a socialist for his tax plan. It’s not like he’s taking all the money away from the rich and making everyone equal in a utopian middle-class. It won’t work. As long are there is money and man, there will always be a class system, but it does not have to be unfair.